About your Search

20110707
20110707
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
of afghanistan to protect us from terrorist threats. by failing to draw down the number of troops in afghanistan, we continue to focus efforts away from the terrorists and needlessly put american soldiers in the line of fire. but this story is about more than numbers and figures, about it's real people who sacrifice everything to keep us safe. on sunday, april 3, of this year, a 21-year-old young marine named harry lu died while serving the country in afghanistan. he was a son of sandy and allen lu, the sister of carmen lu, and he was my nephew. harry died while serving on watch dudey -- duty in helmand province. his unit's goal was to provide security to locals. but three short months before he was set to return home he was gone. ending this year -- this war will save american lives. ending it will let us focus on fighting terrorism around the demrobe. ending the war will save money -- globe. ending war will save money at a time when we need it most. it is time to end the war in afghanistan, bring our troops home and begin seriously addressing our real security needs. the chair: the gentlelady
knowing president hamid karzai and i do i know he wouldn't agree to an afghanistan that was miles away from the sort of human rights development he wants to see progress but we have to have a hierarchy and the hierarchy of needs from the u.k.'s point of view is to focus on security and the capacity the afghan government has to secure its own country. other things have to take place behind them. >> mr. john woodcock? >> guaranteeing that this will be ordered, is that right? >> we haveade announcements about chinooks being ordered and we will stick to those announcements. >> mary mccloud. >> peace and stability in afghanistan helped by leaving an entire lting legacy and i welcome the officer -- in school. also agree with me that it is important for education for all especially young girls. >> i do agree. if you want to see a long-term stable afghanistan that canno be possible by excluding half of the population from being educated. if you look right across north africa and the middle east, permanent education of women is not just important for human-rights but also economic developm
of the defense department as well as the wars in iraq and afghanistan. it does not contain any money, by the way, for libya, but they could be redirected towards libya later if the defense department wanted. but there are not that many major issues. there will probably be a vote or two about afghanistan and summary directing of money. for example, we have already seen debate that would switch money from weapons or maintenance programs for medical research in the defense budget, so there are many small caliber debates that will be going on. an update on the defense spending bill from john donnelly and "congressional quarterly." heated up date on bet -- keep an update on that at cq.com. >> senate republicans and others discussed raising the federal debt ceiling. >> on tomorrow's "washington journal," a look at the ongoing negotiations of raising the federal debt ceiling howard rosen of the peterson institute for international economics after with a look at be intending free trade agreement with columbia, south korea, and panama. "washington journal" on c-span. >> this weekend on booktv on c- span2
a week in afghanistan. among the expenditures, our payment for projects that are rebuilding infrastructure in afghanistan, roads, bridges, schools, in some cases hospitals. "the washington post" recently reported that the afghan government is taxing american aid. we send money there to build a road. we have to hire contractors in order to do that. and the afghan government is trying to tax that money for their own coffers. so it's not enough that our taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on projects to rebuild their infrastructure. the afghan government is literally trying to reach in the pocket and double dip and tax our taxpayers for our taxpayers' generosity in giving them money. . how does that make any sense at all? after this was reported, they are stepping up their efforts to grab that cash. they are doing things like threatening to detain contractors. if they don't pay up, take money that's assigned to build that road and put that money in the afghan covers, the afghan officials are threatening to detain our contractors. they are denying licenses to our contract
military engagements in iraq, afghanistan, and now libya. i speak of the need also of a new smart security to keep america safe. today will be my 399th speech. i look forward to reaching number 400 next week, and i will continue this until my last day as a member of congress, which gives me approximately 18 months, 1 1/2 years, time to bring our troops safely home. during this week, the week that the house is debating the appropriations, i thought it would be fitting to focus on more spending, on the staggering costs that taxpayers are being asked to bear for our military occupation. $10 billion a month is a lot of money, and that's the price tag for the privilege of continuing to wage a 10-year war against afghanistan. $10 billion a month. the american people who are writing that check have a right to ask and to get answers to some very important questions. where is that money going and what exactly is it accomplishing? what are we getting for our $10 billion a month? are we more secure here at home? is the afghanistan central government introducing the rule of law? have we not already de
and done, iraq and afghanistan will suck the treasury dry to the tune of at least $3.7 trillion. enough already. mr. chairman, the pentagon is like that teenager. you keep giving the kid the keys to the car and he keeps crashing it. it's time we cut him off. we must draw the line and we must draw it here. no more money for libya. no more continuance in libyan hostilities. i urge my colleagues, support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: the gentleman says we have gone to war in the name of humanity. in other words, the president's war in libya is so that we can preserve humanity in libya. in the history of peoples, as the gentleman from california has pointed out, in the histories of countries, it has always been the king, the dictator, the tyrant, the chief, the leader that has sent that particular country to war. so when our ancestors got together and they formed a new and perfect union, they decided it would not be the leader,
and afghanistan, then i would be absolutely against that. host: one more headline and then we will move on to the debt talks. "administration offers health care cuts as part of budget negotiations." this is from "the new york times" on tuesday. guest: what the president is trying to get a very recalcitrant bunch of politicians to come to the table and negotiate. he has tried many ways to get republican colleagues to come to some middle ground and has not succeeded and i suspect he is saying, look, i will put everything on the table and let us see what sticks. i suspect that is what he is doing. otherwise we just save about half a trillion dollars in medicare the next -- years through the historic health reform. how you are going to take more out without really hurting seniors, i don't know. host: steny hoyer, your democratic whip, said he was willing to work with the republicans to reduce the debt. what did that mean to you and how willing are you? guest: i think with -- what mr. steny hoyer is saying is most democrats have put things on the table, some very painful things. and i believ
about internally. we've got all these young people coming back from iraq and afghanistan; have made incredible sacrifices; have taken on incredible responsibilities. you see some 23-year-old who's leading a platoon in hugely dangerous circumstances, making decisions, operating complex technologies. these are folks who can perform. but, unfortunately, what we're seeing is that a lot of these young veterans have a higher unemployment rate than people who didn't serve. and that makes no sense. so what we'd like to do is potentially combine a tax credit for a company that hires veterans with a campaign to have private companies step up and do the right thing and hire more veterans. and one of the things that we've done is internally in the federal government we have made a huge emphasis on ramping up our outreach to veterans and the hiring of veterans, and this has been a top priority of mine. the notion that these guys who are sacrificing for our freedom and our security end up coming home and not being able to find a job i think is unacceptable. mr. dorsey: mr. president, this ne
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)